West, Colin P.

Background The benefits of aerobic exercise are well-studied; there is no consensus on the association between resistance training and major adverse cardiovascular outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to address this issue. Design and methods We searched for randomized trials and cohort studies that evaluated the association between resistance training and mortality and cardiovascular events. Two investigators screened the identified abstracts and full-texts independently and in duplicate. Cochrane tools were used to assess the risk of bias. We calculated hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals using random effect models. Results From the 1430 studies identified, 11 (one randomized trial and 10 cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria, totaling 370,256 participants with mean follow-up of 8.85 years. The meta-analysis showed that, compared with no exercise, resistance training was associated with 21% (hazard ratio (95% confidence interval (CI)), 0.79 (0.69–0.91)) and 40% (hazard ratio (95% CI), 0.60 (0.49–0.72)) lower all-cause mortality alone and when combined with aerobic exercise, respectively. Furthermore, resistance training had a borderline association with lower cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio (95% CI), 0.83 (0.67–1.03)). In addition, resistance training showed no significant association with cancer mortality. Risk of bias was low to intermediate in the included studies. One cohort study looked at the effect of resistance training on coronary heart disease events in men and found a 23% risk reduction (risk ratio, 0.77, CI: 0.61–0.98). Conclusion Resistance training is associated with lower mortality and appears to have an additive effect when combined with aerobic exercise. There are insufficient data to determine the potential beneficial effect of resistance training on non-fatal events or the effect of substituting aerobic exercise with resistance training.

Background Bedside rounds (BR) have been proposed as an ideal method to promote patient-centred hospital care, but there is substantial variation in their implementation and effects. Our objectives were to describe the implementation of BR in hospital settings and determine their effect on patient-centred outcomes. Methods Data sources included Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus and Ovid Cochrane Central Registry of Clinical Trials from database inception through 28 July 2017. We included experimental studies comparing BR to another form of rounds in a hospital-based setting (ie, medical/surgical unit, intensive care unit (ICU)) and reporting a quantitative patient-reported or objectively measured clinical outcome. We used random effects models to calculate pooled Cohen's d effect size estimates for the patient knowledge and patient experience outcome domains. Results Twenty-nine studies met inclusion criteria, including 20 from adult care (17 non-ICU, 3 ICU), and nine from paediatrics (5 non-ICU, 4 ICU), the majority of which (n=23) were conducted in the USA. Thirteen studies implemented BR with cointerventions as part of a ‘bundle’. Studies most commonly reported outcomes in the domains of patient experience (n=24) and patient knowledge (n=10). We found a small, statistically significant improvement in patient experience with BR (summary Cohen’s d=0.09, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.14, p<0.001, I2=56%), but no significant association between BR and patient knowledge (Cohen’s d=0.21, 95% CI −0.004 to –0.43, p=0.054, I2=92%). Risk of bias was moderate to high, with methodological limitations most often relating to selective reporting, low adherence rates and missing data. Conclusions BR have been implemented in a variety of hospital settings, often ‘bundled’ with cointerventions. However, BR have demonstrated limited effect on patient-centred outcomes.

Abstract Physician burnout, a work‐related syndrome involving emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and a sense of reduced personal accomplishment, is prevalent internationally. Rates of burnout symptoms that have been associated with adverse effects on patients, the healthcare workforce, costs and physician health exceed 50% in studies of both physicians‐in‐training and practicing physicians. This problem represents a public health crisis with negative impacts on individual physicians, patients and healthcare organizations and systems. Drivers of this epidemic are largely rooted within healthcare organizations and systems and include excessive workloads, inefficient work processes, clerical burdens, work–home conflicts, lack of input or control for physicians with respect to issues affecting their work lives, organizational support structures and leadership culture. Individual physician‐level factors also play a role, with higher rates of burnout commonly reported in female and younger physicians. Effective solutions align with these drivers. For example, organizational efforts such as locally developed practice modifications and increased support for clinical work have demonstrated benefits in reducing burnout. Individually focused solutions such as mindfulness‐based stress reduction and small‐group programmes to promote community, connectedness and meaning have also been shown to be effective. Regardless of the specific approach taken, the problem of physician burnout is best addressed when viewed as a shared responsibility of both healthcare systems and individual physicians. Although our understanding of physician burnout has advanced considerably in recent years, many gaps in our knowledge remain. Longitudinal studies of burnout's effects and the impact of interventions on both burnout and its effects are needed, as are studies of effective solutions implemented in combination. For medicine to fulfil its mission for patients and for public health, all stakeholders in healthcare delivery must work together to develop and implement effective remedies for physician burnout.

Purpose To determine the past experiences with, current use of, and anticipated use of online learning and simulation-based education among practicing U.S. physicians, and how findings vary by age. Method The authors surveyed 4,648 randomly sampled board-certified U.S. physicians, September 2015 to April 2016, using Internet-based and paper questionnaires. Survey items (some optional) addressed past and current technology usage, perceived technology effectiveness, and anticipated future use of specific technology innovations. Results Of 988 respondents, 444 completed optional items. Of these, 429/442 (97.1%) had used online learning and 372/442 (84.2%) had used simulation-based education in the past five years. Desire for more online learning was modest (mean [standard deviation], 4.6 [1.5]; 1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree), as was desire for more simulation-based education (4.2 [1.7]). Both online learning and simulation-based education were perceived as effective (5.2 [1.4]; 5.0 [1.4]). Physicians believed they possess adequate skills for online learning (5.8 [1.2]) and that point-of-care learning is vital to effective patient care (5.3 [1.3]). Only 39.0% used objective performance data to guide their learning choices, although 64.6% agreed that such information would be useful. The highest-rated innovations included a central repository for listing educational opportunities and tracking continuing education credits, an app to award credit for answering patient-focused questions, 5-minute and 20-minute clinical updates, and an e-mailed “question of the week.” Responses to most survey items were similar across age groups. Conclusions Practicing physicians generally seem receptive and prepared to use a variety of educational technologies, regardless of age.